Sentencing without Guidelines [Paperback]

Sentencing matters. Reform initiatives hope to impart more uniformity and fairness in sentencing. Tough-on-crime laws like “three strikes” and mandatory minimum provisions deprive judges of sentencing discretion. While sentencing guidelines have been adopted by approximately 20 states since the early 1980s, many judges operate without guidelines.

Sentencing without Guidelinesis Rhys Hester’s deep dive into how South Carolina, which never passed sentencing guideline legislation, nonetheless created meaningful punishment reform. It achieved uniformity in sentencing with a traveling circuit of judges, informal norms among judges, and the unique phenomenon of the “Plea Judge” to manage cases.

Hester examines how prior convictions, race, and geographical differences impact sentences to explain why individuals get the criminal sentences they do. He also explores how legal reform mechanisms can influence punishment goals and policy.Sentencing without Guidelinesshows the benefits and drawbacks South Carolina experienced as it met sentencing reform goals. These lessons can be translated into policy for other jurisdictions.“The large majority of research over the last thirty years on sentencing discretion comes from the federal courts and the handful of states with sentencing guidelines. This leaves us largely in the dark about how courts make sentencing decisions in most states, which do not have sentencing guidelines. Rhys Hester’sSentencing without Guidelinesfills this gap by examining the dilemma of uniformity versus individualized discretion, the importance of court organizational culture and informal judicial norms, and the considerations that go into punishment decisions in a nonguidelines state. This examination provides valuable conceptual contrasts with typical guidelines states.”—Jeffrey Todd Ulmer, Professor of Sociology and Criminology, Director of the PlC�